i have several amendments that will address the ceqa findings. they start on page 5, line 22, where line 22 would be amended to read, on january 12, 2021, the planning department made the following findings, so replacing the board with the planning department. on the next page, page 6, starting on-line 5, it would say, well, on-line 4, it is not a project as defined by ceqa and the ceqa guidelines, which contained in board of supervisors file number, blank, and this board concurs in this determination. the remainor of the sentence would be struck out, the language reading, and that the sfmta shall consult with the city attorney as to necessary ceqa findings and determinations with respect to any project prior to the expenditure of bond proceeds, so this really is to reflect it was the planning department that made the ceqa findings. >> chair haney: great, so it's pretty straightforward. i want to move to accept the amendments on this item. can we have a roll call vote on the amendments. >> clerk: yes. on the amendments -- [roll call] >> clerk: th

i have several amendments that will address the ceqa findings. they start on page 5, line 22, where line 22 would be amended to read, on january 12, 2021, the planning department made the following findings, so replacing the board with the planning department. on the next page, page 6, starting on-line 5, it would say, well, on-line 4, it is not a project as defined by ceqa and the ceqa guidelines, which contained in board of supervisors file number, blank, and this board concurs in this determination. the remainor of the sentence would be struck out, the language reading, and that the sfmta shall consult with the city attorney as to necessary ceqa findings and determinations with respect to any project prior to the expenditure of bond proceeds, so this really is to reflect it was the planning department that made the ceqa findings. >> chair haney: great, so it's pretty straightforward. i want to move to accept the amendments on this item. can we have a roll call vote on the amendments. >> clerk: yes. on the amendments -- [roll call] >> clerk: th

i am not a lawyer, if i was a lawyer i would never do ceqa or criminal law. i actually think that if you guys conversation with your coun, for what it's worth. >> i'm happy take it up with the ceqa attorney as well as our council at the office of the president. we did have a lengthy conversation about it and that was the advice we received but i appreciate your advice. >> thank you, vice chancellor. >> thank you supervisor. supervisor preston. >> supervisor preston: thank you chair melgar. thank you to the chancellor again for making time and being here personally and to you and your team for being very open and accessible to our office during this past year. a couple thing i want to follow-up on. the first is around the issue of the enforceable agreement and i appreciate chair melgar's question and i'm trying to get a better understanding of your response. i understand that without the benefit of council here, to the regions or to ucsf at your disposal, that you have some concerns about whether ucsf could enter into enforceability provisions contract as part

then adopt the ceqa findings and variance.ear from ep staff first and then current planning on the project itself and we'll open it up to public comment. is staff prepared to make their presentation? >> yes. i would just ask that the shared button is grayed out for me. >> i will make you the presenter momentarily. >> thank you. >> do you see it now? >> yes, i do, thank you. does everyone see my shared screen? >> yes, we do. >> okay, thank you. good afternoon, president koppel, vice-president moore and members of the commission. i'm jennifer mckellar, planning department staff and environmental coordinator for the project we are discussing here. the item for your consideration today is the certification of the project's final environmental impact report for iar. i will now provide a brief overview of the environmental review process and eir conclusions. the project is in the downtown civic center neighborhood. the site was developed with one building, a public parking garage, which is individually eligible for -- in the califor

we fully expect the phase 1 project to have ceqa approval. we expect this will be exempt from ceqa. to the extent that we know phase 2 is going to be complicated and there will be a number of questions that we will not able to answer by springtime. particularly around civil changes, detailed width of the promenade. we do hope to have some clarity and more consensus around some of the keel elements around circulation in parking and traffic. to the extent we'll be going out to the community, telegraphing some of the circulation changes that should be included to the extent that we will hone in the details of parking meter loss in face 2. phase 1 is largely expanding loading and potentially adding back parking. phase 2 there will be additional parking loss in conversion to loading. we don't know what those details are. we hope to get some sort of approval at least environmental level or resolution to support the current thinking come springtime so we can be for competitive to go after grants. with that, we are happy to answer any questions. >> president brandon: thank you, dan, casey a

ceqa issued as a common sense exemption by the planning department on june 16, 2019 located beneath sidewalk, item 36 is the motion to affirm the planning department's determination that this project beneath the sidewalk is exempt from further environmental review. item 37 is the motion to conditionally reverse the exemption determination subject to the adoptionful rent findings. item 38 is the motion to direct the preparation of findings to reverse the determination that this proposed project is further exempt from environmental review. >> president yee: okay. supervisor stefani, would you like make a comment? >> supervisor stefani: i request that we come back to this item. the party is finalizing language on the settlement. there was one last clause we were helping to mediate. they are signing that agreement which will include withdrawal of the appeal. that will be done within the next hour to hour and a half. definitely before this meeting is over. we can come back then the appeal can be withdrawn. >> president yee: okay. we'll come back to this later. let's go to item 3:00 p.m. special o

and ceqa review and they requested an alternative be included in the i.r. that addresses the concerns we laid out. i also want to mention prop h which allows for permits for be reviewed and acted on by the city in 30 days that includes our review. we've started implementation of prop 8 and some businesses that qualify can apply for a permit. qualify can apply for a permit. qualify can apply for a permit. thanks to our staff and across agencies would put this together and got it up and running. that concludes my report. >> item 6, review of past events at the board of supervisors and board of appeals historic preservation commission -- did you have a question? >> the arena allocation you were speaking about. we still have the amount of time of housing units but seals to be maybe shuffling will get different affordability is that correct? different income levels may be allocated to us? >> from the summer draft of plan bay area to the december draft are allocations for about 70,000 units and that's a factor but not the only factor in the arena methodology. bec

i am not a lawyer, if i was a lawyer i would never do ceqa or criminal law. i actually think that if you guys conversation with your coun, for what it's worth. >> i'm happy take it up with the ceqa attorney as well as our council at the office of the president. we did have a lengthy conversation about it and that was the advice we received but i appreciate your advice. >> thank you, vice chancellor. >> thank you supervisor. supervisor preston. >> supervisor preston: thank you chair melgar. thank you to the chancellor again for making time and being here personally and to you and your team for being very open and accessible to our office during this past year. a couple thing i want to follow-up on. the first is around the issue of the enforceable agreement and i appreciate chair melgar's question and i'm trying to get a better understanding of your response. i understand that without the benefit of council here, to the regions or to ucsf at your disposal, that you have some concerns about whether ucsf could enter into enforceability provisions contract as part

i am noi am not a lawyer, if i a lawyer i would never do ceqa or criminal law. i actually think that if you guys conversation with your coun, for what it's worth. >> i'm happy take it up with the ceqa attorney as well as our council at the office of the president. we did have a lengthy conversation about it and that was the advice we received but i appreciate your advice. >> thank you, vice chancellor. >> thank you supervisor. supervisor preston. >> supervisor preston: thank you chair melgar. thank you to the chancellor again for making time and being here personally and to you and your team for being very open and accessible to our office during this past year. a couple thing i want to follow-up on. the first is around the issue of the enforceable agreement and i appreciate chair melgar's question and i'm trying to get a better understanding of your response. i understand that without the benefit of council here, to the regions or to ucsf at your disposal, that you have some concerns about whether ucsf could enter into enforceability provisions contract as part

and those involve ceqa, involve outreach to the community and stakeholders, how those things influence and shape the design that ultimately is built, and then also the financing and contracting for the projects, all through competitive procurement processes at multiple steps in the way. and the point i want to highlight in this process, which is a little bit different than in a conventional procurement, is right in the middle of this diagram, the inclusion of a predevelopment agreement phase that bridges the gap from where we are in the early stages of an r.f.q. and r.f.p. to increasing levels of investment both by the city on the public sector side as well as the development partners on the private sector side to get to a successful financial closing and beginning of construction of the project. the next slide, please, please, eusenia. so i want to make just a quick reference. i think anna made the key points that needed to be made with orespect to one of the elements that we were asked to address in this, the reimbursement payment. i want to emphasize what are the benefits of doing t

and those involve ceqa, involve outreach to the community and stakeholders, how those things influence and shape the design that ultimately is built, and then also the financing and contracting for the projects, all through competitive procurement processes at multiple steps in the way. and the point i want to highlight in this process, which is a little bit different than in a conventional procurement, is right in the middle of this diagram, the inclusion of a predevelopment agreement phase that bridges the gap from where we are in the early stages of an r.f.q. and r.f.p. to increasing levels of investment both by the city on the public sector side as well as the development partners on the private sector side to get to a successful financial closing and beginning of construction of the project. the next slide, please, please, eusenia. so i want to make just a quick reference. i think anna made the key points that needed to be made with respect to one of the elements that we were asked to address in this, the reimbursement payment. i want to emphasize what are the benefits of doing th

that it was a finding not made by ceqa, so it's a determination that the finding was made by planning and not the board. >> chair haney: great. makes sense. i want to move those amendments. can we have a roll call vote on the amendment? >> clerk: yes. on the motion to amend item 15 -- [roll call] >> clerk: there are three ayes. >> chair haney: and those amendments pass, and can i now have -- can we move this item as amended to the full board with a positive recommendation? roll call vote, please. >> clerk: yes. on the motion to recommendation item number 15 to the full board with a positive recommendation as amended -- [roll call] >> clerk: there are three ayes. >> chair haney: great, thank you. >> clerk: excuse me, mr. chair, could we please take action on item number 14? >> chair haney: oh, yes. for item number 14, i want to move that to the full board with a positive recommendation, as well. roll call vote, please. >> clerk: yes. on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: there are three ayes. >> chair haney: great. so 14 and 15 will go to the full board with a positive recommendation

preservation work program, we have surveys, which are cultural district, legacy business, preservation ceqa, preservation h.p.c. activities, and mills act, so totaling right around 22 or 23 s.p.e. for each year. so you can see that we're here today with our introduction. we'll be at planning commission tomorrow, and back here on february 3 and planning commission on february 4. the budget is due on most years on february 21, but this year, that's a sunday, so it's due this year on the 22. we start with the board in june, and then, the budget is considered at the board in july. so this is the presentation here, and there are quite a number of here that are happy to answer questions if there are any from the commissioners. >> clerk: okay. deborah, does that conclude staff's presentation? >> that concludes staff's presentation. >> clerk: okay. if there are no questions or comments, we should take public comment. members of the public, this is your opportunity to press star, three to be entered into the queue. commissioners, i have no members of the public requesting to speak at this time. publ

also, on page 10 under environmental review, the ceqa determination seems long to me. either this is not a project or section 15.378 applies to charges. those two categories are kind of mutuallily exclusive. i don't understand the language in the staff report they're under environmental review. i wonder if the new permit fee for both the rest of this fiscal year and next year, requires board of supervisors approval as a budget amendment under appropriate section under article 8a. finally on that proposed resolution, certification accidents also -- sentence also has the wrong year, it should be 2021 and not 2020. 10.2 and 10.3 on page 4 ceqa determination seems wrong. i support extending the agreement for one year, i would consider operating the garages directly rather than by contract. i would suggest that staff investigate that prior to putting out another r.f.p. maybe we should staff it with city employees rather than a contractor. if i can move on to 10.4. on the fuel tank upgrade project containing and abating these leaking fuel tank is a significant issue. also on

effective november 16, 2020 and adopt ceqa determination and to make the appropriate findings. >> president yee: call the roll. >> clerk: [roll call vote] there are 11 ayes. >> president yee: let's go to roll call for introductions. >> clerk: first up to introduce new business is supervisor ronen. >> supervisor ronen: thank you so much, today i have two items. the first item is legislation to address fraudulent abuse of the city's building permit system. several recent cases perpetrated by department of building inspections were repeated violations, triggered me to hold a hearing in november 2020 to hear about d.b.i. permit practices and to draft this legislation. i called for that hearing with supervisors peskin and haney and the three of rus us are sponsorg this legislation today. the history of fraud correction in our permitting practices is long and ugly. at times there's caught in the spotlight have been d.b.i. staff and management and other times, it's been developers and contractors and consultants who are seeking permit approval. in may 2020, a structural engineer was arrested bethe

my concern is with the ceqa documentation. i'm not sure if this is a project management or environmental staff issue on the bottom of page 2, top of page 3, there's a link to the environmental document. i was able to get that but neither there nor on page 4 in the resolution is the city planning case number referenced. the date is referenced but not the case number. i don't think it's necessary for this approval but in the future, if the case number could be included both in the staff report and the resolution along with the date, i think that would make it more complete. in this case, -- otherwise, this does seem like an important necessary and useful project and i support the contract award. thanks. >> thank you for your comments. there are no more callers in the queue. >> clerk: public comment is closed. >> president maxwell: may i have a motion to and a second? >> so moved. >> second. >> president maxwell: don't race to it. >> i said second. i was muted. >> president maxwell: thank you. roll call vote. roll call vote. [rol

and those involve ceqa, involve outreach to the community and stakeholders, how those things influence and shape the design that ultimately is built, and then also the financing and contracting for the projects, all through competitive procurement processes at multiple steps in the way. and the point i want to highlight in this process, which is a little bit different than in a conventional procurement, is right in the middle of this diagram, the inclusion of a predevelopment agreement phase that bridges the gap from where we are in the early stages of an r.f.q. and r.f.p. to increasing levels of investment both by the city on the public sector side as well as the development partners on the private sector side to get to a successful financial closing and beginning of construction of the project. the next slide, please, please, eusenia. so i want to make just a quick reference. i think anna made the key points that needed to be made with orespect to one of the elements that we were asked to address in this, the reimbursement payment. i want to emphasize what are the benefits of doing t

so i know that this board is very concerned and the staff are concerned about ceqa reviews and the amount of staff time that it takes. it sounds to protect the drivers in a very minor inconvenience for drivers where, you know, not just implementing the full project here. so the t cannot move over, right, it's a fixed route, and it has to stay on the 3rd street bridge. 4th street is about a block away. so there's an easy diversion for drivers here, but instead of having staff employ everything and the board here showing leadership and saying to implement the whole thing so there's no chance that the t can be stuck in traffic, you're asking for a phased approach and trying to make driving as convenient as possible. so there's a lot of extra capacity on the streets right now and i think that the board and the staff should be focused on removing that and repurposing for transit and pedestrian and cycling projects. and i think what you're doing right now is really induced demand here and leaving extra road capacity for the drivers. thank you. >> thank you, mr. brockwall. next speaker, please.

i previously indicated the same desire for ceqa documents for draft d.i.r.s and importance -- response to comments. in reviewing those, it's nice to have. >> i like to make a -- i like to talk about the drawing. it seems like every applicant submits their drawing in a slightly different format. sometimes the proposed and existing around the same page. sometimes they are pages apart. sometimes we get 3d models, sometimes we don't. i'm wondering if an effort can be made if other commissioners feel the same way, to figure out what works best for us in our review and let those become criteria. there may have been efforts in the past. i will be very interested in hearing other commissioner's spotsen this. >> commissioner imperial: i also support commissioner diamond and commissioner moore on the hard copy. as far as i know, the e.i.r. is something we requested it's not mandatory. those are things is very important. in terms of the drawings, it's a lot of going back and forth. when it comes to other very important documents that involves policy or long range development, those things as well

does not maximize the number of units allowed by applicable density restrictions and to affirm the ceqa determination and make the appropriate findings. >> president walton: supervisor peskin on the roster. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, president walton, and thank you, colleagues. as we discussed at yesterday's, seemed like a month, but i think it was on the almost 7-hour land use and transportation committee meeting and congratulations, chair melgar, for your maiden voyage and thank you to my colleagues on the land use committee for our unanimous vote that is before you today as a committee report. these interim controls are designed to discourage the construction of new large single-family home construction and to encourage developers to avail themselves the already permitted density in certain zoning districts that are primarily concentrated, but not solely, on the east side of the city, although they're also on the west side of the city, in residential commercial, residential mixed use, commonly known as rc, rto and rm zoning districts. and this is not an up-zoning. rather, this

report was certified and covered all development in mission bay as required by and in compliance with ceqa. ocii, in consultation with the planning department, provided the tenth addendum to the ocirr. over the past year, aree worked with several entities, and the c.a.c. approved the project and its associated documents at the july 9 meeting and received support from the potrero boosters planned neighborhood development in june. here is the schedule of overview and next steps. a number of amendments and actions were necessary to the mission bay plan documents prior to the board taking any action, and ocii worked closely and collaboratively on the planned project. the plan will come before you again on february 2 and, if approved, will be passed approximately 90 days later. it will begin construction in 2022, with completion in 2024. this concludes our presentation today, and we're happy to respond to any questions you may have. to answer any questions, we have the executive vice president of real estate as well as staff members from ocii and the planning department. thank you. >> president

my concern is with the ceqa documentation.ect management or environmental staff issue on the bottom of page 2, top of page 3, there's a link to the environmental document. i was able to get that but neither there nor on page 4 in the resolution is the city planning case number referenced. the date is referenced but not the case number. i don't think it's necessary for this approval but in the future, if the case number could be included both in the staff report and the resolution along with the date, i think that would make it more complete. in this case, -- otherwise, this does seem like an important necessary and useful project and i support the contract award. thanks. >> thank you for your comments. there are no more callers in the queue. >> clerk: public comment is closed. >> president maxwell: may i have a motion to and a second? >> so moved. >> second. >> president maxwell: don't race to it. >> i said second. i was muted. >> president maxwell: thank you. roll call vote. roll call vote. [roll call vote]. you have four aye